Yet if you take Tim Cook's $500m bonus and divide it by every employee in Apple, not just the foot soldiers, it works out at over $7k per employee.

No he is not. When he says that the check is not looking for WWW.hacks.com he means that the Steam check isn't looking for the record of you connecting to the site, it's looking for the record of a specific process on your syste trying to DNS resolve the site.

It's funny how the UK as a country believes that raising minimum wage would kill it's businesses.

If your business pays someone £6.20 an hour and can't afford to pay them £7.20 then you own a terribly fragile business, because ultimately there are many, many other factors that could have the same financial effect on your business as a 14% rise in bottom line wages and all the businesses that can't handle this are hiring from mainland Europe anyway. I meant that's the whole reason British industry sucks.

Depends really. Clean up the gov't by removing the right for them to dictate their own wages/payment and the right to private lobbying.

Instead give all 'contestants' the ability to draw a fixed amount from the public pocket based on their or their family's wages. And then limit their budget in case they already have substantial private wealth.

Bear in mind that for every 1 meter of distance your wattage goes down by a factor of four, as its light falloff. That means a laser defense system is going to have a very small range at which it will be able to penetrate a thermally reinforced hypersonic missile vs a normal one. Every single time you put a little more plate on the missile you lower the range at which enemy defenses will be able to damage it at all.

With something as simple as new heat sinking and intel on the positions of laser AMS, you can see holes in AMS systems that your foe thinks are well guarded and send hundreds or thousands of targeted strikes the moment your heat sinking tech steps ahead of the laser defense system's TDP. If you keep your missile at range, that isn't even all that hard.

Technically it's two counts of conspiracy to commit GBH/Assault, one for each opposing party since you colluded with all.

The constitution is not the only source or rights on this planet. If comparing countries, driving is not a privilege, as in no mans land everyone could drive.

Privileges are granted to you. Rights are taken away. I believe GP meant it in that regard.

"Well then unfortunately you would not be able to make a purchase at all. In the interests of security, you have to login in order to buy over Paypal, so you would be stopped from making your purchase at the checkout if you are blocked from logging into PayPal at work. I'm sorry but there isn't much I can do for you at this end."

That is wrong. Pro Tools is the most popular DAW in the world, followed by Apple Logic and FL Studio and Presonus Studio Live, then Ableton Live and Propellorheads Reason neck and neck, then Reaper.

The problem with your statement in relation to his is that you have only proven that there are more gun-related incidents when there are more guns, which would be normal and could be net reductions when displayed as a percentage of total personally owned guns on the street. In actuality he was arguing that when there are more incidents in total regardless of factoring in the use of guns, when concealed carry guns are legal.

Put it this way. If I live in a village or 1000 with legal guns, 10 people die of guns and 10 people die non-accidentally from other weapons, they have a 2% mortality rate on this statistic.

He is stating that had there been no concealed carry guns you may have only had 5 gun related deaths (from illegal guns), but due to felons not having to suspect that their prey is carrying, as well as many other reasons that the sidewalk isn't as safe when the population is seen as weak, 20 people may have died from other weapons as a result of a lower level of personal defense and deterrence.

Because all of your statistics are only pointing at gun-owners, and/or gun related crimes you would see the latter statistic as indicating that concealed carry permits are generally a bad idea, when in actuality that static would show them as being beneficial in reducing crime as a whole.

If efficiency is the only meter for transport, then walking is most efficient. In case it's not obvious we use cars because we want to get to places quickly, and cars certainly compare favorably to aeroplanes.

Also, that figure you pulled would have been created by pulling very very low RPM in the highest gear possible. It's not a realistic figure as any lower results in stalling your car engine and at that kind of long gearing, increasing speed is not practical without a downshift.

How about them sitting first and last on the "only unit cracked" end of the line. The logic is not faulty, you're just too lazy to actually do a little research before making assumptions of bad logic.

If it's a possibility and is not ruled out directly within a sentence then it becomes a logical conclusion.

I'm pretty sure none of that was willful, more likely an extension of the pressure the US had been putting on the country ever since they managed to cave Sweden in over the Pirate Bay situation. Threatening trade restrictions and the destruction of one's economy is a grave grave thing, and once a country is broken and bows to your will, it doesn't change for a long time.

See: http://torrentfreak.com/wikileaks-cable-shows-us-involvement-in-swedish-anti-piracy-efforts-101207/

It doesn't matter if you put it into cash or not, it matters if you remove it from the bank. Look let me basically explain fractional reserve so we're all on the same page.

Lets say a bank operates at a 1:10 ratio. This is extremely conservative for a bank btw. Every dollar they hold, they can get 9 dollars on loan from the Fed. That means to loan out $100k they need $1k. Now if they loan it out for 10% APR over a single year (for simplicity) their end return would be $10k, a profit of 1000%. Now here's where you get things messed up. That $1k doesn't actually need to be held by the Fed, it's still in your account, and if you withdraw that $1k, they lose 10 times the purchasing power. If a bank has a total of 100k in holdings and has 75 of those loans out, 26 defaults OR 26 withdrawals from savings accounts amounting to $26k puts it into administration unless the bank can temporarily borrow capital till the completion of the other loans, forcing it to call in the other loans.

Now to add to that factor, and explain why deflation is so bad for these guys, if the market inflates 10% that year and the loans aren't inflation adjusted, then you actually owe them 121k as they loaned you something that is now worth less, but your repayments are adjusted for inflation. If the market deflates 10% however, they only break even on all loans, and that combine with operating costs makes them at a loss, before you factor in a loss. This is why banking is the worst industry to give control of setting the inflation rate. Nearly every member of the Fed in an ex banker, and still has extensive ties to banking, hence inflation being constantly peddled as a good idea.

Remember that this was at 1:10 ratio. Imagine it at 1:50, or 1:70 as many were working at when the crisis happened.

Not really. Inflation devalues all currency by the same percentile value. This is then put into new currency, most of which is given to the rich figures in the trickle-down economics model. So if I take 10% from a country and give it all to the rich, the end result is the rich get richer.